Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM65921
Volume:
10 |
7 |
Jul 2026
Pages:
1-8
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.

Principal
St. Francis Evening College
Dr. Karthik P
St. Francis Evening College
The rapid growth of electronic commerce has encouraged organizations to implement advanced personalization techniques to improve customer experiences and increase purchase outcomes. This study examines the influence of personalized recommendation systems on consumer purchase intention within e-commerce platforms. Data were collected from 1,000 online consumers and analyzed using descriptive statistics, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), mediation analysis, logistic regression, and multi-group analysis. The findings indicate that respondents exhibited moderate perceptions regarding recommendation accuracy, personalization quality, trust, usefulness, and satisfaction. The structural model demonstrated excellent goodness-of-fit indices; however, none of the hypothesized relationships were statistically significant. Furthermore, purchase intention did not significantly predict actual purchase behavior. The results suggest that although personalized recommendation systems contribute to positive consumer perceptions, they may not independently drive purchase decisions. The study highlights the importance of considering additional behavioral and contextual factors when examining consumer purchasing decisions in digital commerce environments.
KEYWORDS
The present study investigated the impact of personalized recommendation systems on consumer purchase intention within e-commerce platforms. Using data collected from 1,000 online consumers, the study examined the relationships among recommendation accuracy, perceived relevance, personalization quality, trust, privacy concerns, perceived usefulness, customer satisfaction, purchase intention, and actual purchase behavior through Structural Equation Modeling, mediation analysis, logistic regression, and multi group analysis. The descriptive findings indicated that respondents generally held moderate perceptions regarding recommendation accuracy, personalization quality, trust, usefulness, and satisfaction. The normality and multicollinearity assessments confirmed the suitability of the data for advanced statistical analysis. Furthermore, the structural model demonstrated excellent goodness-of-fit indices, indicating that the proposed conceptual framework adequately represented the observed data. Despite the satisfactory model fit, the empirical results revealed that none of the hypothesized relationships were statistically significant. Personalization quality did not significantly influence perceived relevance or trust. Similarly, trust, privacy concerns, perceived usefulness, and customer satisfaction did not significantly predict purchase intention. In addition, purchase intention failed to significantly influence actual purchase behavior. The mediation analysis further confirmed that perceived relevance did not mediate the relationship between personalization quality and trust. The low R-square values obtained across all endogenous constructs indicate that the variables included in the model explained only a small proportion of consumer purchase behavior. These findings suggest that consumers' purchasing decisions are influenced by factors beyond personalized recommendations. Variables such as product quality, pricing, brand reputation, perceived value, delivery reliability, prior experience, and promotional incentives may play a more substantial role in shaping online purchasing decisions. The study contributes to the literature on e-commerce consumer behavior by demonstrating that positive perceptions of personalization do not necessarily translate into stronger purchase intentions or actual purchasing behavior. The findings emphasize that personalization should be viewed as one component of a broader customer experience strategy rather than a standalone driver of purchasing decisions. In conclusion, while personalized recommendation systems may enhance user experience and improve consumer perceptions, they were not found to be significant determinants of purchase intention or actual purchase behavior in the present study.
1. Ameen, N., Tarhini, A., Reppel, A., & Anand, A. (2021). Customer experiences in the age of artificial intelligence. Computers in Human Behavior, 114, 106548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106548 2. Davenport, T. H., Guha, A., Grewal, D., & Bressgott, T. (2020). How artificial intelligence will change the future of marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(1), 24–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00696-0 3. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519 4. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2022). Multivariate data analysis (9th ed.). Cengage Learning. 5. Huang, M. H., & Rust, R. T. (2021). A strategic framework for artificial intelligence in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 49(1), 30–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-020-00749-9 6. Kotler, P., Keller, K. L., & Chernev, A. (2023). Marketing management (16th ed.). Pearson. 7. Li, F., Larimo, J., & Leonidou, L. C. (2021). Social media marketing strategy and consumer engagement. Journal of Business Research, 123, 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.045 8. Pappas, I. O., Kourouthanassis, P. E., Giannakos, M. N., & Chrissikopoulos, V. (2017). Explaining online shopping behavior with technology acceptance and flow theory. Information & Management, 54(6), 733–747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.11.001 9. Schiffman, L. G., Wisenblit, J., & Kumar, S. R. (2022). Consumer behavior (13th ed.). Pearson. 10. Shankar, V. (2023). How artificial intelligence is reshaping retailing. Journal of Retailing, 99(2), 219–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2023.01.002
Publication Date
7/8/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
6
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
12
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...